An open letter to the 68kMLA community...

[luddite]

We have a long way to go... there are a couple of threads in the Lounge that have exceeded 600 replies.

 

[Mars478]

To go off topic again luddite, Your ][e server is not loading on my end...

info?

 

[Dog Cow]

To go off topic again luddite, Your ][e server is not loading on my end...info?

He has to wind up the generator again. ;D

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Flash!, although I do agree with you that the time limit on editing posts isn't that smart, your use of the edit feature isn't too smart either - please use the preview button before submitting your posts. Remember, preview first.

Agreed! However:

1) think.

2) type

3) preview

4) correct grammar /spelling/phrasing etc.

5) preview

6) reflect upon what you've written and google info/open a new window and re-read the post to which you're replying

7) preview - think about it some more . . . THEN . . . hit the submit button!

Quick, thoughtless replies will gain you no glory here! But thoughtful/insightful/helpful posts will make you name shine . . .

. . . and get more comrades to take you seriously . . . [] ]'>

. . . as opposed to ignoring your byline! =8-P

IMHO, of course! [] ]'>

 

[porter]

Agreed! However:

0) Search

See if it's already been asked/said before.

 

[Flash!]

Flash!, although I do agree with you that the time limit on editing posts isn't that smart, your use of the edit feature isn't too smart either - please use the preview button before submitting your posts. Remember, preview first.

A) the edits were kind of intentional

B) what's "not smart" about using the edit feature? (that's a rhetorical question, I don't really need an answer!)

C) once upon a time when you edited your post, a timestamp (Edited by: username at: such and such time) was inserted into the post makining it blatently obvious that the post had been edited . Somewhere along the line that functionality was dropped....

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

. . . once upon a time when you edited your post, a timestamp (Edited by: username at: such and such time) was inserted into the post makining it blatently obvious that the post had been edited . Somewhere along the line that functionality was dropped....

Yet another very good reason for the time limit!

Writing is a re-iterative process, best done while in the POST/PREVIEW windows or even offline in a word processor when it comes to any serious attempt at accuracy, clarity . . .

. . . brevity . . . (Yeah, riiiiiggghhhhtttttt! You oughta' try that one on for size, jt! :lol: ) [] ]'>

. . . whatever, post carefully, post often, make corrections in a new post and offer some additional tidbit of info while you're at it! This has been proven to promote MORE DISCUSSION of the topic on hand, jog the collective memory of the MLA and/or promote the personal banter in the threads that has ALWAYS been a key BENIFIT of life here in the ranks of the 68kMLA!

IMHO, as always. :beige:

 

[~tl]

C) once upon a time when you edited your post, a timestamp (Edited by: username at: such and such time) was inserted into the post makining it blatently obvious that the post had been edited . Somewhere along the line that functionality was dropped....

It should still do that, though phpBB has always seemed to be a little inconsistent in whether it does or whether it doesn't...

 

[Mike Richardson]

How come we can't have smilies in signatures, but we can have a picture of an 8 ball?

Actually, we can't have the 8. But 80 mini HP or whoever can.

I was going to make a really neat signature like this:

Now's the time to

Adopt a Mac!

 

[Mike Richardson]

C) once upon a time when you edited your post, a timestamp (Edited by: username at: such and such time) was inserted into the post makining it blatently obvious that the post had been edited . Somewhere along the line that functionality was dropped....

It should still do that, though phpBB has always seemed to be a little inconsistent in whether it does or whether it doesn't...

I think it only does it when the post is edited more than an hour since it was made, so as to not clutter up the post because someone just wanted to fix a typo. So, it's never seen anymore now.

 

[Mars478]

How come we can't have smilies in signatures, but we can have a picture of an 8 ball?
Actually, we can't have the 8. But 80 mini HP or whoever can.

I was going to make a really neat signature like this:

Now's the time to

Adopt a Mac!

That would be awesome. All the 8 Ball image in Jt's sig is a Gif @ here images/smilies/icon_smile_8ball.gif

But I don't know how it got there if no IMG's are allowed in the sigs!

Maybe he activated Images in Sigs for a second so that he could set his and then removed it?

I want an iMage in my signature!

 

[MrMacPlus]

IIRC we used to be able to put smilies in our sigs. Another case of "disable the source of a nonexistent problem," eh? xx(

 

[Mars478]

I like your signature

[hint: the beggining]

 

[Mike Richardson]

IIRC we used to be able to put smilies in our sigs. Another case of "disable the source of a nonexistent problem," eh? xx(

I think smilies in signatures are harmless. We're talking about tiny GIF images that are cached in the browser already. They require almost no extra network resources to be used. They take up very little space in the signature. The worst you could do is fill your entire signature with smilies, which might cause your posts to take up a lot of space, but you could do the same thing now using certain Unicode characters.

 

[MrMacPlus]

I like your signature[hint: the beggining]

Mine? }

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

AFAIK, smilies in signatures went away when we got to use avatars, but I could be wrong. And yes, as I was attempting to reconstruct my traditional sig from waaaayyyyyy back in the 68kMLA day. Without my knowledge, ~tl did, in fact, enable smilies in sigs for a just a bit, told me about it afterward and that if I tried to edit my sig, my beloved [8] would disappear from even my sig. As they say: rank . . . and maybe even old age . . . hath its priveledges!

I assume that my [8] was "grandfathered in" so to speak, cus I'm a crusty ole' curmudgeon/cantankerous old coot with a (badly leaking) boatload of knowledge about arcane Apple architectures and peripherals lore . . .

. . . and I'm crazy!

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

. . . it's convenient to have an automagically attached sig, but you also lose a LOT of your ability to express yourself by using one.

If you recall, before I resurrected the old sig with the [8] and the AC-130H Gunship linkage, I used to be able to express myself better with the use of variations on my traditiona =8-\ .TXT based "smilie" depending on my mood ATM and I was also able to add on a series of postscripts, sometimes for fun, often to make additional, if sometimes tangential, comments after signing off manually.

Now that capability is gone as long as I use my auto-sig . . . bleh! =8-P

you win some, you lose some, some get rained out, and then there's the lockout issue. [] ]'>

 

[Mike Richardson]

The forum software must be pre-parsing signatures. Otherwise, smilies would disappear as soon as they were disabled.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

The forum software must be pre-parsing signatures. Otherwise, smilies would disappear as soon as they were disabled.

Now that you have brought it to my attention with your pithy sig commentary: a note to the wise!

You are very lucky that the forum software isn't parsing for signatures containing advertisements for commercial interests, (AKA Spam) try to keep a bit lower profile, comrade!

 

[MacJunky]

I do not get why images in your sigs are such a big deal..

Yea, trash80 has a little one but really, he has been around far longer than most of us. If anything he has earned it by being useful for so many years.

Just get over it. No images in sigs and no editing after one hour are the least of you worries. It is a small price to pay, in fact, those features are incredibly useless compared to keeping the community active and mostly on topic and useful.

Stop concerning yourselves with minor garbage and focus on the community.